[geoff]

http://www.prosoundweb.com/article/a...sonality_type/

geoff

[JackA]

On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 3:24:25 AM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
http://www.prosoundweb.com/article/a...sonality_type/

geoff

Over my head. Any quiz from Amateur Sound?

Jack

[Frank Stearns]

JackA writes:

On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 3:24:25 AM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
http://www.prosoundweb.com/article/a...sonality_type/

geoff

Over my head.

It's funny as hell, if you been in both the PA and recording worlds.

Frank
Mobile Audio

--

[JackA]

On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 9:59:05 AM UTC-4, Frank Stearns wrote:
JackA writes:

On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 3:24:25 AM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
http://www.prosoundweb.com/article/a...sonality_type/

geoff

Over my head.

It's funny as hell, if you been in both the PA and recording worlds.

Oh, okay, nothing serious.

Like this one...

17) Your mix sounds amazing because...
--You use a lot of expensive outboard gear - 7 points
--You use a really huge mixing board - 6 points
--You have lots and lots of inputs from stage - 7 points
--All of the above - 0 points

Aren't mixing boards out of date??
Do they have digital ones? Assume yes.


Jack


Frank
Mobile Audio

--
.

[Frank Stearns]

JackA writes:

On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 9:59:05 AM UTC-4, Frank Stearns wrote:
JackA writes:

On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 3:24:25 AM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
http://www.prosoundweb.com/article/a...sonality_type/

geoff

Over my head.

It's funny as hell, if you been in both the PA and recording worlds.

Oh, okay, nothing serious.

Like this one...

17) Your mix sounds amazing because...
--You use a lot of expensive outboard gear - 7 points
--You use a really huge mixing board - 6 points
--You have lots and lots of inputs from stage - 7 points
--All of the above - 0 points

Aren't mixing boards out of date??

Uh, noooo. We still need a way to combine signals. Perhaps you're referring to
"virtual" v. "real" consoles.

I don't mind a virtual console for recording (in fact, have gotten to prefer it
for mixing, though I do sometimes miss an analog console for tracking).

But for PA, a "virtual-only" console would be a cluster-F of epic proportions.

Even Yamaha's "Stagemix" (a cute little paged virtual console app on an I-pad that
will remotely-control their big digital PA consoles) is not reliable or fast enough
for mixing a show.

It's great for walking the house during sound checks and mixing monitors while on
stage with the performers, but wireless connections tend to fail when you need them
the most -- such as when some dolt on stage points a mic at a monitor, the system
starts into oscillation, and YOU suddenly can't get to the damn virtual fader or
virtual mute button to remedy the problem.

Do they have digital ones? Assume yes.

Yes, many years now. Some are quite good. And if set up correctly, you can be faster
on a digital console than a similarly-equipped analog console, and in a much smaller
footprint.

Frank
Mobile Audio

--

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 9/22/2015 11:54 AM, JackA wrote:

17) Your mix sounds amazing because...
--You use a lot of expensive outboard gear - 7 points
--You use a really huge mixing board - 6 points
--You have lots and lots of inputs from stage - 7 points
--All of the above - 0 points

Aren't mixing boards out of date??

Some smaller studios and mix-only and mastering studios are built around
a DAW with not a mixing console in sight. But tracking studios that have
a lick of sense have a mixing console for flexibility and true zero
latency input monitoring.

Nearly all live sound reinforcement uses a mixing board. When you have
to react quickly you don't have time to fool with clicks and menus.

Do they have digital ones? Assume yes.

Yes. A digital mixing console offers a number of advantages for live
mixing. Nearly all major shows and many small shows and bands who carry
their own sound equipment use a digital console these days. But there's
trouble brewing from the rise in availability of "knobless digital
mixers" that are operated from a phone, tablet, or computer. They're
cheap because they have no control surface, and when something becomes
cheap, eventually what it attempts to replace will become unavailable.



--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[JackA]

On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 3:59:04 PM UTC-4, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 9/22/2015 11:54 AM, JackA wrote:

17) Your mix sounds amazing because...
--You use a lot of expensive outboard gear - 7 points
--You use a really huge mixing board - 6 points
--You have lots and lots of inputs from stage - 7 points
--All of the above - 0 points

Aren't mixing boards out of date??

Some smaller studios and mix-only and mastering studios are built around
a DAW with not a mixing console in sight. But tracking studios that have
a lick of sense have a mixing console for flexibility and true zero
latency input monitoring.

Nearly all live sound reinforcement uses a mixing board. When you have
to react quickly you don't have time to fool with clicks and menus.

Do they have digital ones? Assume yes.

Yes. A digital mixing console offers a number of advantages for live
mixing. Nearly all major shows and many small shows and bands who carry
their own sound equipment use a digital console these days. But there's
trouble brewing from the rise in availability of "knobless digital
mixers" that are operated from a phone, tablet, or computer. They're
cheap because they have no control surface, and when something becomes
cheap, eventually what it attempts to replace will become unavailable.



--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

Mike, thanks!! I'm sure some people know one way of doing something and they wish to stay that way. Like, someone asked Alan Parson if he'd consider digital processing, he replied that he didn't know. However, in particular cases, mixing consoles allow simplicity.

Knob-less? Keep me posted if you can!!

Thanks.

Jack

[Angus Kerr]

On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 9:59:04 PM UTC+2, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 9/22/2015 11:54 AM, JackA wrote:

17) Your mix sounds amazing because...
--You use a lot of expensive outboard gear - 7 points
--You use a really huge mixing board - 6 points
--You have lots and lots of inputs from stage - 7 points
--All of the above - 0 points

Aren't mixing boards out of date??

Some smaller studios and mix-only and mastering studios are built around
a DAW with not a mixing console in sight. But tracking studios that have
a lick of sense have a mixing console for flexibility and true zero
latency input monitoring.

Nearly all live sound reinforcement uses a mixing board. When you have
to react quickly you don't have time to fool with clicks and menus.

Do they have digital ones? Assume yes.

Yes. A digital mixing console offers a number of advantages for live
mixing. Nearly all major shows and many small shows and bands who carry
their own sound equipment use a digital console these days. But there's
trouble brewing from the rise in availability of "knobless digital
mixers" that are operated from a phone, tablet, or computer. They're
cheap because they have no control surface, and when something becomes
cheap, eventually what it attempts to replace will become unavailable.



--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

I think one of the major advantages with digital mixers for live work, particularly festivals, is that you can save a number of scenes for each act's live settings. So after their sound check, you can save their monitor and eq settings, and then do another one and then recall the original when that band walks on stage. My experience on the performer side of the mic is that the sound engineers are too lazy to even save the settings, and when you walk on stage for your act where the monitor level was set perfectly, the monitor which was there, is now gone, and you are frantically trying to get some sound. An electric violin without a monitor CANNOT be played. If you can't hear what you are doing, you cannot pitch your notes accurately.

At a particular festival that I was playing with (electric violin) with a dear friend, who was headlining (I think he had a 1 1/2 hour slot), there was a momentary power interruption. Just 5 seconds. I know this because my day job is a power engineer and I probably set the dead time for that particular recloser on that network. Anyhow, the whole rig went out. No problem, the power was back in 5 seconds. Let's go again!

Then the stage hand comes out and says, sorry, the digital desk takes 20 minutes to reboot. We were only half way through the set, just getting ready to start ripping up the tempo for the finale. We had to abandon the show and walk off stage - it was devastating. If it had been analog, we would have just carried on. I'll take a scratchy fader over a dead digital rig anyday..

Even though I am a follower of technology, and I really enjoy it, folks don't always appreciate that a change of technology just changes your problems.. It takes the old ones away and gives you new ones you never thought of. So that sound company should have foresaw the power interruption and put at least their desk on a UPS. But that costs money, so they didn't.

With analog, we would have completed the show.

-A.

[geoff]

On 23/09/2015 8:44 p.m., Angus Kerr wrote:
UPS. But that
costs money, so they didn't.

With analog, we would have completed the show.

Not if a main out fader died. At least not without a panic and some
frantic workarounds.

geoff

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 9/23/2015 4:44 AM, Angus Kerr wrote:
I think one of the major advantages with digital mixers for live
work, particularly festivals, is that you can save a number of scenes
for each act's live settings. So after their sound check, you can
save their monitor and eq settings, and then do another one and then
recall the original when that band walks on stage.

You have festivals with sound checks? What a luxury. I can see the
value for a week long festival where you have the same acts every day,
or a weekend festival where an act may go on twice in a day. But the
real advantage is for touring bands that do the same show night after
night, or small bands that mix themselves from from the stage who have
made presets for particular songs or instrument changes.

My experience on
the performer side of the mic is that the sound engineers are too
lazy to even save the settings, and when you walk on stage for your
act where the monitor level was set perfectly, the monitor which was
there, is now gone, and you are frantically trying to get some sound.

That's a problem that a digital console can't solve. But saving
settings, even the state of the board when the set is over, is one more
chore and one more thing to think about before you can start getting
ready for the next band. If you don't have to leave the console you can
make that part of your routine, but at nearly every change, I'm up at
the stage telling people where to put mics and monitors or plugging in
direct boxes. It's hard to find good help for what are usually
volunteer-run festivals.

At a particular festival that I was playing with (electric violin)
with a dear friend, who was headlining (I think he had a 1 1/2 hour
slot), there was a momentary power interruption. Just 5 seconds.
Then the stage hand comes out and says, sorry, the digital desk takes
20 minutes to reboot.

That's pretty outrageous, but even 20 or 30 seconds can seem like an
eternity when there's no sound. All modern digital consoles continually
update the settings and store them in non-volatile memory so that at
least the console powers up the way it was when power was lost. But I've
worked with more than one analog console that loses all the mute setups
when power is lost.

Even though I am a follower of technology, and I really enjoy it,
folks don't always appreciate that a change of technology just
changes your problems. It takes the old ones away and gives you new
ones you never thought of.

Exactly. But sometimes you don't get the choice to stick with your old
problems. The rental company brings out a digital console and you have
10 minutes to figure out how to get sound out of it before the band
comes on stage.

So that sound company should have foresaw
the power interruption and put at least their desk on a UPS. But that
costs money, so they didn't.

When I bring my Mackie HDR24/96 out to a remote gig, I bring a small UPS
for it. The recorder writes to RAM and dumps it to the hard drive about
every 15 minutes (or when the Stop button is pressed) rather than
streaming to the drive full time (1998 design) so without being able to
do an orderly shutdown, it's possible to lose as much as the last 15
minutes of the recording.


--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 9/23/2015 6:12 AM, geoff wrote:
On 23/09/2015 8:44 p.m., Angus Kerr wrote:
With analog, we would have completed the show.

Not if a main out fader died. At least not without a panic and some
frantic workarounds.

The thing about a digital console is that, other than failure of a mic
preamp, switch, or fader, when something goes wrong, you don't lose only
one channel or one output. If you have a few spare channels and outputs,
with an analog console you can usually get back on the air pretty
quickly, but you usually don't have that opportunity with a digital
console.

--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Frank Stearns]

Angus Kerr writes:

-snips-

I think one of the major advantages with digital mixers for live work, part=
icularly festivals, is that you can save a number of scenes for each act's =
live settings. So after their sound check, you can save their monitor and e=
q settings, and then do another one and then recall the original when that =

Yes, indeed, this is a handy feature of modern digital consoles.

-snip-

Then the stage hand comes out and says, sorry, the digital desk takes 20 mi=
nutes to reboot. We were only half way through the set, just getting ready =

20 minutes??? That would be one desk to stay away from. Do you remember what they
were using?

But beyond that, these days its negligent *not* to have a UPS in the rack to protect
and sustain (at least for a few minutes) the digital components. Too much depends on
this gear.

Many parts of the power grid world over are somewhat rickety, and 10-500 ms
brown outs or switching drop-outs are far too common.

Even when the grid is modestly newer, problems occur. I'm up in the high desert
mountains of the American Southwest; lightning hits are common and thus 20-40 ms
protection brownouts (my best guess) are common.

According to the event counters on the two larger UPS units installed here (one on
the audio gear; one on the phone and data gear), we average one such event per day.
Some stormy days it might be 6-12 events per day (storm might not even be in our
immediate area); otherwise a very calm week might go by trip-free.

Frank
Mobile Audio
--

[Angus Kerr]

You have festivals with sound checks? What a luxury. I can see the
value for a week long festival where you have the same acts every day,
or a weekend festival where an act may go on twice in a day. But the
real advantage is for touring bands that do the same show night after
night, or small bands that mix themselves from from the stage who have
made presets for particular songs or instrument changes.

Agreed.

Would have been nice on a show I did with 2 3 night runs (again with electric violin - do I ever learn?) where after the sound check and the show started I had nothing. Playing in position on the violin without hearing what you are doing is like listening to a catfight. After that I dragged in my own powered monitor every day to make sure I had sound.

They were using an analogue desk. But even then, if you set a monitor level at sound check, surely all you do is mute the channel and leave the aux send as it is? Why bother to do a sound check if you're going to reset the monitor level?


My experience on
the performer side of the mic is that the sound engineers are too
lazy to even save the settings, and when you walk on stage for your
act where the monitor level was set perfectly, the monitor which was
there, is now gone, and you are frantically trying to get some sound.

That's a problem that a digital console can't solve. But saving
settings, even the state of the board when the set is over, is one more
chore and one more thing to think about before you can start getting
ready for the next band. If you don't have to leave the console you can
make that part of your routine, but at nearly every change, I'm up at
the stage telling people where to put mics and monitors or plugging in
direct boxes. It's hard to find good help for what are usually
volunteer-run festivals.

This festival had plenty of hands on deck, all paid. No overworked sound engineer running up to the stage and back to the console. At a volunteer festival, I would have more understanding. Plus, we only had a bodrun, acoustic, two violins and a vocal mic on stage. Not exactly high load. So I'm not knocking the engineer, I've been both sides of the mic. Sometimes you are unable to deliver good sound. I mixed sound once where I had to use all of the sweepable parametrics to get rid of a nasty low mid feedback/resonance. The Toms sounded like cardboard. The gig sounded thin and reedy. But there wasn't much I could do.

Then the stage hand comes out and says, sorry, the digital desk takes
20 minutes to reboot.

That's pretty outrageous, but even 20 or 30 seconds can seem like an
eternity when there's no sound. All modern digital consoles continually
update the settings and store them in non-volatile memory so that at
least the console powers up the way it was when power was lost. But I've
worked with more than one analog console that loses all the mute setups
when power is lost.


Even though I am a follower of technology, and I really enjoy it,
folks don't always appreciate that a change of technology just
changes your problems. It takes the old ones away and gives you new
ones you never thought of.

Exactly. But sometimes you don't get the choice to stick with your old
problems. The rental company brings out a digital console and you have
10 minutes to figure out how to get sound out of it before the band
comes on stage.



So that sound company should have foresaw
the power interruption and put at least their desk on a UPS. But that
costs money, so they didn't.

When I bring my Mackie HDR24/96 out to a remote gig, I bring a small UPS
for it. The recorder writes to RAM and dumps it to the hard drive about
every 15 minutes (or when the Stop button is pressed) rather than
streaming to the drive full time (1998 design) so without being able to
do an orderly shutdown, it's possible to lose as much as the last 15
minutes of the recording.

You are being proactive and responsible, not just 'taking a chance'. I'd be happy doing a performance knowing you were in control....

[Angus Kerr]

Then the stage hand comes out and says, sorry, the digital desk takes 20 mi=
nutes to reboot. We were only half way through the set, just getting ready =

20 minutes??? That would be one desk to stay away from. Do you remember what they
were using?

No idea, but I was pretty flabbergasted. 20 minutes. But being on stage, no sound, people getting restless, you just do as you are told and get off. But I really felt for him, he was the headline act and really got kicked in the ***


But beyond that, these days its negligent *not* to have a UPS in the rack to protect
and sustain (at least for a few minutes) the digital components. Too much depends on
this gear.

I would have thought so. But.....


Many parts of the power grid world over are somewhat rickety, and 10-500 ms
brown outs or switching drop-outs are far too common.


10 - 200ms is very good. Even half a second isn't as bad as it can get. The power supplies should tolerate modest voltage depressions.


Even when the grid is modestly newer, problems occur. I'm up in the high desert
mountains of the American Southwest; lightning hits are common and thus 20-40 ms
protection brownouts (my best guess) are common.

This was a mountain festival. There was a thunderstorm around, and there was a strike (I presume) on the direct feeder that was feeding us. So we lost power completely.

I would say that the best possible brownout scenario where a short circuit happens on an adjacent feeder (to the one you are on) is about 100ms. That's awesome protection, 20 - 40ms, that's something else - perhaps LV circuit breakers operating. A brownout (we call it 'voltage dip') out in the rural area could last as long as 2 seconds.

According to the event counters on the two larger UPS units installed here (one on
the audio gear; one on the phone and data gear), we average one such event per day.
Some stormy days it might be 6-12 events per day (storm might not even be in our
immediate area);

That's cause the short circuit affects all parts of the network that are within impedance range, or the source impedance of the entire network is poor..

otherwise a very calm week might go by trip-free.

Frank
Mobile Audio
--
.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Mike Rivers wrote:
On 9/23/2015 6:12 AM, geoff wrote:
On 23/09/2015 8:44 p.m., Angus Kerr wrote:
With analog, we would have completed the show.

Not if a main out fader died. At least not without a panic and some
frantic workarounds.

The thing about a digital console is that, other than failure of a mic
preamp, switch, or fader, when something goes wrong, you don't lose only
one channel or one output. If you have a few spare channels and outputs,
with an analog console you can usually get back on the air pretty
quickly, but you usually don't have that opportunity with a digital
console.

One of my worst memories of working in the broadcast industry was
hot-plugging modules on the console while the DJ was doing a show....
we need digital gear that is designed to allow that sort of thing.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[geoff]

On 24/09/2015 12:22 a.m., Angus Kerr wrote:

Then the stage hand comes out and says, sorry, the digital desk
takes 20 mi= nutes to reboot. We were only half way through the
set, just getting ready =

20 minutes??? That would be one desk to stay away from. Do you
remember what they were using?

I'd say that somebody with an agenda was telling a story, or there was a
very sick d-mixer.

Haven't heard a huge buzz about d-mixers taking a long time to start up.
Or failing at all for that matter .

geoff

[[email protected]]

So, speaking of festivals, I have an interesting story.
This weekend, we attended an outdoor oldies festival.
As we walked toward the seating area, I heard strong deep bass, and since
I enjoy bass, I was looking forward to the show.
We found a spot to sit, set up our chairs and settled down to enjoy the show.

After a few minutes I noticed, what happened to the bass?

I got up and walked around and lo and behold, as I walked toward the direction of the sound desk, the bass was back. The bass was great in many areas of the audience, but in the area we happened to sit, it was weak.

Looking at the speakers, I see they had two flying vertical arrays, one on
each side of the stage, and under each array was a group of subs. so i see
there were two widely separated groups of subs.

My conclusion is that it is a bad idea to have 2 widely separated groups of subs because even if you wire them with the correct polarity (phasing) due to the long wavelengths, there will always be some areas of the audience where there is cancellation.

Is it common practice to have 2 groups of subs?

The acts were great and we enjoyed the show, despite the lack of bass.


Mark

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Mike Rivers wrote:
On 9/23/2015 6:12 AM, geoff wrote:
On 23/09/2015 8:44 p.m., Angus Kerr wrote:
With analog, we would have completed the show.

Not if a main out fader died. At least not without a panic and some
frantic workarounds.

The thing about a digital console is that, other than failure of a mic
preamp, switch, or fader, when something goes wrong, you don't lose only
one channel or one output. If you have a few spare channels and outputs,
with an analog console you can usually get back on the air pretty
quickly, but you usually don't have that opportunity with a digital
console.


My favorite digital console story is on a Presonus. The singer uses a
"vocal processor". When the singer would hit a certain patch
on the "vocal processor", the Presonus would tolerate it
for about fifteen seconds, then crowbar. Power-on reset.

Hilarity ensured.

--
Les Cargill

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:
My conclusion is that it is a bad idea to have 2 widely separated groups of subs because even if you wire them with the correct polarity (phasing) due to the long wavelengths, there will always be some areas of the audience where there is cancellation.

Is it common practice to have 2 groups of subs?

If this is done properly, and "properly" might mean using delays, then the
overall system efficiency is improved and leakage is dramatically reduced.
You arrange it so that the areas of cancellation are to the sides where people
are not sitting, putting all the energy into the seats and none of the energy
into the food trucks.

Now, sometimes it's impossible to do it properly, and those situations
include outdoor events in the round where people are sitting in a 180 or
even 360 degree arc around the stage. And in those situations, you bring
a different system.

The acts were great and we enjoyed the show, despite the lack of bass.

This is why it's important for the PA guy to walk the hall. You notice
something like this, you get one of the stacks shut off. Mind you, it can
be hard to explain to the roadies how shutting speakers down will make the
bass louder...
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 9/23/2015 6:33 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
My favorite digital console story is on a Presonus. The singer uses a
"vocal processor". When the singer would hit a certain patch
on the "vocal processor", the Presonus would tolerate it
for about fifteen seconds, then crowbar. Power-on reset.

My favorite PreSonus StudioLive console story is that when the meters
were set to display channel input levels and everything got really loud
at the same time so all the meters had all of their LEDs turned on, the
power supply took a dump. The company did the right thing once they
figured out what was happening and replaced the power supply in the
mixers that were out in the field. The power supply wasn't under-rated,
its protection was just too conservative.

It was funny, though, because after one person reported that problem on
the forum, everybody else had to try it, and the reports flooded in.

--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Eric Weaver]

On 09/23/2015 06:40 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:


One of my worst memories of working in the broadcast industry was
hot-plugging modules on the console while the DJ was doing a show....

.... and putting a big "thump" in the middle of a song because I forgot
to put it on only Mono bus before switching it on...

we need digital gear that is designed to allow that sort of thing.

There's a bit more of it lately but not enough.

[Trevor]

On 23/09/2015 9:23 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 9/23/2015 6:12 AM, geoff wrote:
On 23/09/2015 8:44 p.m., Angus Kerr wrote:
With analog, we would have completed the show.

Not if a main out fader died. At least not without a panic and some
frantic workarounds.

The thing about a digital console is that, other than failure of a mic
preamp, switch, or fader, when something goes wrong, you don't lose only
one channel or one output. If you have a few spare channels and outputs,
with an analog console you can usually get back on the air pretty
quickly,

Not when the main power supply blows up, a fairly common failure mode
for some cheap mixers with switch mode supplies.

Trevor.

[JackA]

On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 4:41:21 PM UTC-4, wrote:
So, speaking of festivals, I have an interesting story.
This weekend, we attended an outdoor oldies festival.
As we walked toward the seating area, I heard strong deep bass, and since
I enjoy bass, I was looking forward to the show.
We found a spot to sit, set up our chairs and settled down to enjoy the show.

After a few minutes I noticed, what happened to the bass?

I got up and walked around and lo and behold, as I walked toward the direction of the sound desk, the bass was back. The bass was great in many areas of the audience, but in the area we happened to sit, it was weak.

Looking at the speakers, I see they had two flying vertical arrays, one on
each side of the stage, and under each array was a group of subs. so i see
there were two widely separated groups of subs.

My conclusion is that it is a bad idea to have 2 widely separated groups of subs because even if you wire them with the correct polarity (phasing) due to the long wavelengths, there will always be some areas of the audience where there is cancellation.

Is it common practice to have 2 groups of subs?

The acts were great and we enjoyed the show, despite the lack of bass.

You should have found the sound engineers and suggested a different profession, flipping burgers! :-)

Jack


Mark

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Trevor wrote:
On 23/09/2015 9:23 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 9/23/2015 6:12 AM, geoff wrote:
On 23/09/2015 8:44 p.m., Angus Kerr wrote:
With analog, we would have completed the show.

Not if a main out fader died. At least not without a panic and some
frantic workarounds.

The thing about a digital console is that, other than failure of a mic
preamp, switch, or fader, when something goes wrong, you don't lose only
one channel or one output. If you have a few spare channels and outputs,
with an analog console you can usually get back on the air pretty
quickly,

Not when the main power supply blows up, a fairly common failure mode
for some cheap mixers with switch mode supplies.

That's why the expensive mixers come either with redundant supplies, or the
rental house ships you two Midas supplies in one rack so you can swap over
in the event of a failure.

I worked with one PA guy who liked to split everything from his console out
to the house board so that if everything went totally wrong with the console
he could mix the show from the house board in an emergency. It sure beats
mixing house sound from the monitor console.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

On 23-09-2015 21:41, wrote

So, speaking of festivals, I have an interesting story.
This weekend, we attended an outdoor oldies festival.
As we walked toward the seating area, I heard strong deep bass, and since
I enjoy bass, I was looking forward to the show.

We found a spot to sit, set up our chairs and settled down to enjoy the show.
After a few minutes I noticed, what happened to the bass?

I got up and walked around and lo and behold, as I walked toward the
direction of the sound desk, the bass was back. The bass was great
in many areas of the audience, but in the area we happened to sit,
it was weak.

Multiple sources always lead to comb filtering.

Looking at the speakers, I see they had two flying vertical arrays, one on
each side of the stage, and under each array was a group of subs. so i see
there were two widely separated groups of subs.

All is explained.

My conclusion is that it is a bad idea to have 2 widely separated
groups of subs because even if you wire them with the correct polarity
(phasing)

Do not say phase unless you mean it, when yuo mean polarity say polarity.

due to the long wavelengths, there will always be some areas
of the audience where there is cancellation.

It has nothing to do with the wavelength per se. Midrange units side to
side create the most wonderful combfilters that allow the audience to
get one ear damaged and one not. What has with the wavelength to do is
the size of the loud and not so loud spots.

Is it common practice to have 2 groups of subs?

Yes. Just as it was common practice if you had 4 2350 horns each side to
put them side by side for optimum dispersion. Which they would have had
if stacked into a twisted column. It took six years to get that message
across, eventually most setups got the stacking sensible.

The acts were great and we enjoyed the show, despite the lack of bass.

In the scenario you describe they should have arranged the subs in one
line from stack to stack, ie. a column on its side. It causes a bit of
loss upwards, but keeps the bass reasonably uniform in the audience
area. I saw a diagram of a solution with a second row of (fewer) subs
behind the audience area time-aligned to be in opposite polarity and
aimed backwards to stop spill-over. The simulated chart was impressive
in that regard, a rectangular lawn full of bass and fairly rapid
fall-off outside it.

Mark

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[JackA]

On Thursday, September 24, 2015 at 5:24:56 PM UTC-4, Peter Larsen wrote:
On 23-09-2015 21:41, wrote



Do not say phase unless you mean it, when yuo mean polarity say polarity.


Excuse me, but when two stereo speakers are incorrectly wired, they are known to be out of phase. Where is the problem, Peter?

Jack


due to the long wavelengths, there will always be some areas
of the audience where there is cancellation.

It has nothing to do with the wavelength per se. Midrange units side to
side create the most wonderful combfilters that allow the audience to
get one ear damaged and one not. What has with the wavelength to do is
the size of the loud and not so loud spots.

Is it common practice to have 2 groups of subs?

Yes. Just as it was common practice if you had 4 2350 horns each side to
put them side by side for optimum dispersion. Which they would have had
if stacked into a twisted column. It took six years to get that message
across, eventually most setups got the stacking sensible.

The acts were great and we enjoyed the show, despite the lack of bass.

In the scenario you describe they should have arranged the subs in one
line from stack to stack, ie. a column on its side. It causes a bit of
loss upwards, but keeps the bass reasonably uniform in the audience
area. I saw a diagram of a solution with a second row of (fewer) subs
behind the audience area time-aligned to be in opposite polarity and
aimed backwards to stop spill-over. The simulated chart was impressive
in that regard, a rectangular lawn full of bass and fairly rapid
fall-off outside it.

Mark

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[[email protected]]

JackA wrote: "Excuse me, but when two stereo speakers are incorrectly wired, they are known to be out of phase.
Where is the problem, Peter?

Jack
- show quoted text -"

Sorry Jack - but Larsen is correct on this matter. Polarity is reversed when the
leads to one speaker are switched. Phase is a time-related effect. The sound
of speakers wires out of polarity sounds like out-of-phase, but out-of-phase is
the wrong term.

[John Williamson]

On 25/09/2015 13:20, wrote:
JackA wrote: "Excuse me, but when two stereo speakers are incorrectly wired, they are known to be out of phase.
Where is the problem, Peter?

Jack
- show quoted text -"

Sorry Jack - but Larsen is correct on this matter. Polarity is reversed when the
leads to one speaker are switched. Phase is a time-related effect. The sound
of speakers wires out of polarity sounds like out-of-phase, but out-of-phase is
the wrong term.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I when I refer to the polarity on a speaker, I
refer to it's absolute phase (Correct phasing here being the cone moving
in for negative voltage relative to the ground connection, out for
positive), while I use phase to refer to the relative output from a pair
of speakers. If both cones go in and out together, they are in phase. If
the listener is not positioned centrally between the speakers, then the
apparent relative phasing at the listening position is fouled up anyway,
hence the dead spots for bass in the auditorium at the concert.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[JackA]

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 10:57:35 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
On 25/09/2015 13:20, wrote:
JackA wrote: "Excuse me, but when two stereo speakers are incorrectly wired, they are known to be out of phase.
Where is the problem, Peter?

Jack
- show quoted text -"

Sorry Jack - but Larsen is correct on this matter. Polarity is reversed when the
leads to one speaker are switched. Phase is a time-related effect. The sound
of speakers wires out of polarity sounds like out-of-phase, but out-of-phase is
the wrong term.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I when I refer to the polarity on a speaker, I
refer to it's absolute phase (Correct phasing here being the cone moving
in for negative voltage relative to the ground connection, out for
positive), while I use phase to refer to the relative output from a pair
of speakers. If both cones go in and out together, they are in phase. If
the listener is not positioned centrally between the speakers, then the
apparent relative phasing at the listening position is fouled up anyway,
hence the dead spots for bass in the auditorium at the concert.

We agree. If I take one stereo track and advance or retard it, I could also replicate a polarity change.

Where a polarity was not marked on speakers, I'd just use a 1.5V battery and observe the cone movement.

Jack

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Scott Dorsey]

John Williamson wrote:
Maybe I'm wrong, but I when I refer to the polarity on a speaker, I
refer to it's absolute phase (Correct phasing here being the cone moving
in for negative voltage relative to the ground connection, out for
positive), while I use phase to refer to the relative output from a pair
of speakers.

A lot of people do this, but it is not correct.

If both cones go in and out together, they are in phase. If
the listener is not positioned centrally between the speakers, then the
apparent relative phasing at the listening position is fouled up anyway,
hence the dead spots for bass in the auditorium at the concert.

This is properly called "relative polarity." If you think about it, you
will see it really doesn't have anything to do with phase, which is in a
sense a kind of delay.

I know people throw the word "phase" around to mean a lot of things that
have little or nothing to do with phase. They refer to both absolute and
relative polarity as being "out of phase." They refer to comb filtering
as "phasing." None of this is strictly speaking correct although I have
given up on trying to correct people.

I do still correct people for saying "wire" when they mean cable and
"filming" when they mean "video recording," though.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[JackA]

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 8:20:15 AM UTC-4, wrote:
JackA wrote: "Excuse me, but when two stereo speakers are incorrectly wired, they are known to be out of phase.
Where is the problem, Peter?

Jack
- show quoted text -"

Sorry Jack - but Larsen is correct on this matter. Polarity is reversed when the
leads to one speaker are switched. Phase is a time-related effect. The sound
of speakers wires out of polarity sounds like out-of-phase, but out-of-phase is
the wrong term.

Mark, as I mentioned to John, phasing can also change polarity. If I take a 30 Hz sine-wave, in stereo, and change the phasing, by advancing or retarding one of the two stereo tracks, I can also change polarity. Both are time related.

Jack

[Roy W. Rising[_2_]]

(Scott Dorsey) wrote:
[snip]

I do still correct people for saying "wire" when they mean cable and
"filming" when they mean "video recording," though.
--scott

Throughout the era of videotape recording, I gave 'em slack. After all,
videotape is a kind of "film". Now that we've gone digital, I'm seeking a
shorter expression than "video recording". "Videoing" doesn't work for me.
Any suggestions?

--
~ Roy
"If you notice the sound, it's wrong!"

[John Williamson]

On 25/09/2015 16:17, JackA wrote:
On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 10:57:35 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
Maybe I'm wrong, but I when I refer to the polarity on a speaker, I
refer to it's absolute phase (Correct phasing here being the cone moving
in for negative voltage relative to the ground connection, out for
positive), while I use phase to refer to the relative output from a pair
of speakers. If both cones go in and out together, they are in phase. If
the listener is not positioned centrally between the speakers, then the
apparent relative phasing at the listening position is fouled up anyway,
hence the dead spots for bass in the auditorium at the concert.

We agree. If I take one stereo track and advance or retard it, I could also replicate a polarity change.

Only for a single frequency sine, triangular or square wave and only for
a delay of half the cycle time or odd multiple thereof. For any other
waveform or delay, you get comb filtering in the sound field which
varies with the position of the listener, the delay and the frequency.

Any complex wave, such as any music I've ever heard, and you get an
undesirable "phasing" sound, which some guitarists use to good effect.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

On 24-09-2015 23:05, JackA wrote:

On Thursday, September 24, 2015 at 5:24:56 PM UTC-4, Peter Larsen wrote:
On 23-09-2015 21:41, wrote

Do not say phase unless you mean it, when yuo mean polarity say polarity.

Excuse me, but when two stereo speakers are incorrectly wired,
they are known to be out of phase. Where is the problem, Peter?

The proper statement is that they are wired with opposite polarity.

Jack

- Peter Larsen

[Scott Dorsey]

Roy W. Rising wrote:
(Scott Dorsey) wrote:
[snip]

I do still correct people for saying "wire" when they mean cable and
"filming" when they mean "video recording," though.

Throughout the era of videotape recording, I gave 'em slack. After all,
videotape is a kind of "film". Now that we've gone digital, I'm seeking a
shorter expression than "video recording". "Videoing" doesn't work for me.
Any suggestions?

If it's perforated, you're filming! If it's not perforated, you're taping!

These days, though, most folks aren't filming OR taping... I don't have a
good word but 'shooting' is sufficiently generic to be inoffensive.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

On 25-09-2015 16:31, JackA wrote:

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 8:20:15 AM UTC-4, wrote:

JackA wrote: "Excuse me, but when two stereo speakers are incorrectly wired,
they are known to be out of phase.
Where is the problem, Peter?

Sorry Jack - but Larsen is correct on this matter. Polarity is reversed when the
leads to one speaker are switched. Phase is a time-related effect. The sound
of speakers wires out of polarity sounds like out-of-phase, but out-of-phase is
the wrong term.

Mark, as I mentioned to John, phasing can also change polarity.

NO!. Use as sin squared pulse and get wiser. Or a sinewave with second
harmonic. Or look at the asymmetry of real world sound. No time delay
makes that change. Polarity inversion does. THAT is why it is necessary
to use the proper words.

If I take a 30 Hz sine-wave, in stereo, and change the phasing,
by advancing or retarding one of the two stereo tracks, I can
also change polarity.

No. Please commence actual thinking. The polarity of the wave is defined
when it starts or via the coordinate system referenced. That definition
is not altered by delay of the wave.

Jack

- Peter Larsen

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

On 25-09-2015 16:47, Roy W. Rising wrote:

(Scott Dorsey) wrote:
[snip]

I do still correct people for saying "wire" when they mean cable and
"filming" when they mean "video recording," though.

--scott

Throughout the era of videotape recording, I gave 'em slack. After all,
videotape is a kind of "film". Now that we've gone digital, I'm seeking a
shorter expression than "video recording". "Videoing" doesn't work for me.
Any suggestions?

Film. Movies are digital, video is digital, there is no difference.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[John Williamson]

On 25/09/2015 16:24, Scott Dorsey wrote:
John Williamson wrote:
Maybe I'm wrong, but I when I refer to the polarity on a speaker, I
refer to it's absolute phase (Correct phasing here being the cone moving
in for negative voltage relative to the ground connection, out for
positive), while I use phase to refer to the relative output from a pair
of speakers.

A lot of people do this, but it is not correct.

If both cones go in and out together, they are in phase. If
the listener is not positioned centrally between the speakers, then the
apparent relative phasing at the listening position is fouled up anyway,
hence the dead spots for bass in the auditorium at the concert.

This is properly called "relative polarity." If you think about it, you
will see it really doesn't have anything to do with phase, which is in a
sense a kind of delay.

The delay from any single signal source to the listening position is a
linear function of the distance from each speaker, with a constant part
due to any delay in the electronics, which on a decent system can be
ignored, and as the listener moves round, the relative phases of the
sounds from the speakers alters, assuming the cones move in and out at
the same time. This is why I would refer to speakers correctly connected
as being in phase. If you add a delay line to one speaker, they no
longer move at the same time, so are not in phase. Changing the relative
polarity of the speakers would, to me, involve reversing the connections
on one speaker so that the cones no longer move in the same direction at
the same time when fed an identical signal, so the cone movement is 180
degrees out of phase.

I know people throw the word "phase" around to mean a lot of things that
have little or nothing to do with phase. They refer to both absolute and
relative polarity as being "out of phase." They refer to comb filtering
as "phasing." None of this is strictly speaking correct although I have
given up on trying to correct people.

Inverted absolute polarity is a phase inversion from the start of the
chain to the end, starting with the varying sound pressure at the
microphone, and can matter, but I would call it inverted absolute
polarity, not being out of phase. On the other hand, where the
duplicated signals from two otherwise identical channels come out as
upside down copies of each other, then they are out of phase with each
other (In this case by 180 degrees).

When you sometimes deliberately use comb filtering as an effect, you
apply a delay to part of a signal, and mix the two parts back together,
so altering the relative phases of the two parts of the signal, and this
is why it's commonly known as phasing, but you knew that already. Now,
explain "flanging" for the same effect. ;-)

I do still correct people for saying "wire" when they mean cable and
"filming" when they mean "video recording," though.

I'm just coming round to using line to mean the thing I use to tie the
boat to the jetty, after calling it a rope for years before I bought the
boat...


--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[JackA]

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 11:58:23 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
On 25/09/2015 16:17, JackA wrote:
On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 10:57:35 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
Maybe I'm wrong, but I when I refer to the polarity on a speaker, I
refer to it's absolute phase (Correct phasing here being the cone moving
in for negative voltage relative to the ground connection, out for
positive), while I use phase to refer to the relative output from a pair
of speakers. If both cones go in and out together, they are in phase. If
the listener is not positioned centrally between the speakers, then the
apparent relative phasing at the listening position is fouled up anyway,
hence the dead spots for bass in the auditorium at the concert.

We agree. If I take one stereo track and advance or retard it, I could also replicate a polarity change.

Only for a single frequency sine, triangular or square wave and only for
a delay of half the cycle time or odd multiple thereof. For any other
waveform or delay, you get comb filtering in the sound field which
varies with the position of the listener, the delay and the frequency.

Any complex wave, such as any music I've ever heard, and you get an
undesirable "phasing" sound, which some guitarists use to good effect.

Depends on what you personally feel is undesirable sound. For example, the 60's music group, Count Five, and their hit, "Psychotic Reaction" - that (stereo version) incorporated playing with the phasing as I mentioned. Sort of like people trying to sync stereo tracks to a premixed mono track. It may sound very full, then very thin, single or multiple frequencies.

Jack

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[JackA]

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 12:30:08 PM UTC-4, Peter Larsen wrote:
On 25-09-2015 16:31, JackA wrote:

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 8:20:15 AM UTC-4, wrote:

JackA wrote: "Excuse me, but when two stereo speakers are incorrectly wired,
they are known to be out of phase.
Where is the problem, Peter?

Sorry Jack - but Larsen is correct on this matter. Polarity is reversed when the
leads to one speaker are switched. Phase is a time-related effect. The sound
of speakers wires out of polarity sounds like out-of-phase, but out-of-phase is
the wrong term.

Mark, as I mentioned to John, phasing can also change polarity.

NO!. Use as sin squared pulse and get wiser. Or a sinewave with second
harmonic. Or look at the asymmetry of real world sound. No time delay
makes that change. Polarity inversion does. THAT is why it is necessary
to use the proper words.

If I take a 30 Hz sine-wave, in stereo, and change the phasing,
by advancing or retarding one of the two stereo tracks, I can
also change polarity.

No. Please commence actual thinking. The polarity of the wave is defined
when it starts or via the coordinate system referenced. That definition
is not altered by delay of the wave.

Jack

- Peter Larsen

Don't feel DAW is appropriate, so I don't use it. Don't feel "Oldies" has an real definition, but million continually and mindlessly use it.

When Angus mention a "plate" and "heater", was he warming his dinner or referring to vacuum tubes? You didn't jump in there and correct him, it's "filament", not a "heater". Don't think I'm being a wise-a**, just TRYING to understand the need for expertise here when we all knew what Mark meant.

Jack